Elephant tusk, rhino horn ban denies Zim millions

Sunday News Reporter
THE ban on the trade in rhino horn and exports of elephant tusks has denied Zimbabwe hundreds of millions of dollars in potential revenue as the country is sitting on close to 70 tonnes of elephant tusks and an estimated five tonnes of rhino horn. Elephant tusk exports and trade in rhino horn were banned in 1997 by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES), which has classified the two species as endangered.
The ban followed failure by some countries to curb massive poaching of the two species, whose numbers were deteriorating at alarming rates in the 1980s, with the jumbo population in the continent dropping from about 1,2 million to about 450 000 in 10 years.

Under CITES, the Zimbabwean rhino is categorised under Appendix One, which places a complete ban on the trade of the rhino horn.
Local elephants, which initially were under Appendix One, are now classified under Appendix Two, which allows the country to trade in live elephants and other elephant products, but not ivory.

The five tonnes of rhino horn Zimbabwe has, if sold at $84 000 per kg, the highest selling price on the black market, could bring into the country about $420 million, while the 70 tonnes of elephant tusks are estimated to be worth about $10,5 million on the local market, with the price relatively higher on the international market.

However, the five tonnes of rhino horn are reportedly deteriorating in quality due to attacks by weevils.
Despite the Appendix One classification of local elephants, which allows the country to trade in live elephants and other elephant products, there have been efforts by the country’s enemies to block the country from realising any proceeds from its wildlife especially elephants and rhinos.

Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (Zimparks) acting director for conservation, Mr Geoffreys Matipano, said apart from lobbying CITES for permission to periodically sell elephant tusks the country was also considering the sale of as many as 62 live elephants to China, France and the United Arab Emirates.

If the proposed sale of the elephants sails through, with each elephant being sold for between $40 000 and $60 000 each, depending on age, the country could realise more than $3 million , which Mr Matipano said will go towards conservation.

Mr Matipano said the country was exploring various options to dispose the ever increasing stockpiles of rhino horns and elephant tusk stockpiles, to raise money to run national parks and conservancies, as well as create storage space which was quickly running out.

The authority’s central stores in Harare can only accommodate up to 65 tonnes of ivory yet the stockpiles continue to increase each year with Zimparks saying it collects an average of 1,1 tonnes of ivory monthly.

Mr Matipano said his department was also incurring huge costs of keeping the tusks and ivory, money which he said could be used to meet other obligations such as animal conservation.

“If we were not a member of the CITES we could just carry out our business and sell the tusks and rhino horns, but because we are a part of CITES and we would want to remain part of it, we are looking at developing the best mechanism which gives us a long term solution to the problem of the stockpiles.
“We would prefer an arrangement whereby, just like other elephant products, we are allowed to dispose tusks periodically and not seek CITES approval.

For rhino horns we would want the same sort of arrangement, but first we must have the rhino classified under Appendix Two. That’s our first hurdle,” he said.

Mr Matipano added that if the country was to be allowed to sell its stocks of rhino horns, the proceeds would go towards conservation of the existing population of elephants and rhinos.

Zimbabwe was last permitted to sell bulk ivory in 2008, about three tonnes sold to Chinese and Japanese buyers in 2008, and the country can only propose another bulk sale before CITES in 2017.

“Our argument is that classification of endangered animals should be done country by country, because each country has different populations of these animals. For example we have an elephant population that is overwhelming our capacity and such circumstances should be considered when classifying endangered animals.

“If we were to be allowed to periodically sell bulk ivory and rhino horn we would realise a lot of money that will be channelled towards conservation. We have always argued that we need to use the dead animals to conserve the living,” said Mr Matipano.

In what has been largely viewed as subtle extension of economic sanctions imposed on the country, the US government, last year placed a ban on the importation of elephant trophies hunted in Zimbabwe.

The US government, through its agents, has also been on record leading a hyped outcry condemning Zimbabwe’s trade in live elephants, arguing that the animals were ill-treated during transit with some reportedly dying.

Mr Matipano said such efforts by the US government smacked of economic sabotage as they were aimed at blocking the country from realising money from its resources.

“Their reasons for banning elephant trophy imports don’t make any sense. All they do is talk and talk yet they are doing nothing to help our conservation efforts. They have other motives outside the conservation arena.

“This is just another example of sanctions being imposed on the country, now targeting the tourism industry. The outcry on ill-treatment of live elephants we sell has no basis, because everything we do is above board according to set standards and regulation,” he said.
Zimbabwe has an overwhelming population of elephants of more than 80 000, against a national carrying capacity of about 40 000.